Subject: [PATCH] kprobes: bugfix: checks kprobes_all_disarmed in unoptimized_kprobe().

From: [email-masked] (Wang Nan)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:04:14 +0800

Hi Masami Hiramatsu,

I can't find this patch and '[PATCH] kprobes: bugfix: checks kprobes_all_disarmed
in unoptimized_kprobe().' in current mainline. How do these patches get there?
Should they be merged into Russell King's tree first?

Thank you!

On 2015/1/12 20:52, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2015/01/12 21:09), Wang Nan wrote:
>> Original code failed to disarm the probed instruction after
>>
>> echo 0 > /sys/kernel/debug/kprobes/enabled
>>
>> if OPTPROBE is enabled.
>>
>> This patch checks kprobes_all_disarmed in unoptimized_kprobe().
>>
> 
> Looks good :)
> 
> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <[email-masked]>
> 
> Thank you!
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <[email-masked]>
>> ---
>>  kernel/kprobes.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
>> index 9471710..f16936b 100644
>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
>> @@ -630,6 +630,9 @@ static void unoptimize_kprobe(struct kprobe *p, bool force)
>>  {
>>  	struct optimized_kprobe *op;
>>  
>> +	if (kprobes_all_disarmed)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	if (!kprobe_aggrprobe(p) || kprobe_disarmed(p))
>>  		return; /* This is not an optprobe nor optimized */
>>  
>>
> 
>